A. Beane
K. Rowley
EDU572
Technology Plan Evaluation
1. Describe your personal philosophy regarding leadership in technology (what do you need to be successful and what role do you take on the process).
In my role, I have clear boundaries for when to use the technology and when it is not appropriate--tools are not babysitters, although I do allow play time it is always toward the end goal of learning a new platform to share knowledge and present. In my room, I'm aware of what kids are doing with technology. I try to focus, guide, and direct students in their use. I teach, model, share, and learn myself.
2. Identify the technology planning infrastructure in your school or district.
There is a district technology committee that has written a plan after one year of regionalization. It is safe to say this plan will undergo many revisions, especially with the results of the Future Search. Currently the data from the Future Search meeting is unavailable. The past year's technology decisions were largely made at the administrative level only without staff input.
3. Please describe your school's technology advisory/steering committee. How does this committee interact with other key groups on campus (curriculum, assessment, budgeting, etc.)
Currently, the technology committee for Dirigo High School is a proposed a committee for 2010-2011 with identified leader as of yet. Kurt and Amity have agreed to co-chair this committee and go through the steps of establishing the structure of the committee including mission, vision, goals, and assessment.
Do you have any additional insights and/or concerns regarding technology support in your school?
Additional concerns include restrictive discipline policies that do not align to the vision of the technology plan, lack of time for professional development and curriculum integration, teacher input in policy-making, and restrictions on teacher-delivers content such as internet radio, internet video, and social learning.
Determine the degree of leadership, input, and involvement required in your school’s technology
plan from core members:
We are working from the district plan because we do not have a Dirigo High School plan.
Superintendent
Leadership: high
Input: high
Involvement: high Local School Administrator
Leadership: low
Input: low
Involvement: medium Technology Coordinator
Leadership: high
Input: high
Involvement: high Classroom Teacher
Leadership: high
Input: high
Involvement: high Parents
Leadership: low
Input: low
Involvement: low Community Members
Leadership: low
Input: low
Involvement: low
4. Describe the mission statement and objectives of your school’s technology plan. These provide
general directions for the plan and should align with your school/district philosophy statement.
Explain how the mission & objectives address student needs.
The mission statement addresses equitable access to a technology-rich environment, life-long learning and good citizenship, and success in an ever-changing society. This is in line with Dirigo High School's mission. At the district level, the mission statement and vision has been in process through a program called Future Search. This information will soon be made available to the district. In reality, the technology plan mission statement alludes to providing citizenship skills, which are definitely needed especially in a "flat world".
5. Moving technology initiative forward requires the support of a lot of people. Please identify the
parties included in your technology plan:
28 people represent the committee.
c Administrative commitment-10% membership (3)
c Faculty/staff commitment-82% membership (23)
c School board commitment-3.5% membership (1)
c Parental commitment-not identified
c Community member commitment: 3.5% membership (1) If any of these are not included, please indicate why you think they haven’t been included and if
you think they should/shouldn’t be included.
There has been no attempt to include parents as a subgroup of the committee. In our opinion this shows a lack of parental involvement in the development of the plan. As the biggest stakeholders, it is recommended they be included in future committee work. At least 10% of the committee should be comprised of parents.
6. Does your school technology plan specifically address your school’s hardware, software,
peripheral equipment & support/training needs? The key is that the plan considers what already
exists in the school, what can be used, and what is needed to begin to align your existing
technology program with where you want to be.
This is a strength of the plan: we know what we have, we know what we use, we know what we need, and we know we need training. With ten schools in the new district, this deserves kudos for the obvious work of cataloging technology hardware and software.
7. Does your school technology plan include an evaluation process to determine how the technology
is used & the effectiveness of these tools/approaches?
Unfortunately, the technology plan admits at its conclusion that in regards to assessment and accountability measures that "its too early in the life of the RSU to determine how all the assessment for the foregoing plan will be handled."
8. Does your school technology plan address multiple sources of funding (in-school, district,
contributions, grants, donations, state initiatives, federal initiatives, fund-raising, etc)?
This plan is referred to as a wish list, quote: "It is thus impossible to know what percentage of our wish list will survive the local budget process or receive the desired level of support from outside sources." The assumption is that funding is beyond the control of the plan with no clear course of action to look for funding outside of the district budget.
9. What does your plan’s communication network look like? Please be sure to include
responsibilities.
The plan is in .pdf form found in the Leadership Team subfolder on the FirstClass network. It is a work in progress and available to read, if you can find it.
K. Rowley
EDU572
Technology Plan Evaluation
1. Describe your personal philosophy regarding leadership in technology (what do you need to be successful and what role do you take on the process).
In my role, I have clear boundaries for when to use the technology and when it is not appropriate--tools are not babysitters, although I do allow play time it is always toward the end goal of learning a new platform to share knowledge and present. In my room, I'm aware of what kids are doing with technology. I try to focus, guide, and direct students in their use. I teach, model, share, and learn myself.
2. Identify the technology planning infrastructure in your school or district.
There is a district technology committee that has written a plan after one year of regionalization. It is safe to say this plan will undergo many revisions, especially with the results of the Future Search. Currently the data from the Future Search meeting is unavailable. The past year's technology decisions were largely made at the administrative level only without staff input.
3. Please describe your school's technology advisory/steering committee. How does this committee interact with other key groups on campus (curriculum, assessment, budgeting, etc.)
Currently, the technology committee for Dirigo High School is a proposed a committee for 2010-2011 with identified leader as of yet. Kurt and Amity have agreed to co-chair this committee and go through the steps of establishing the structure of the committee including mission, vision, goals, and assessment.
Do you have any additional insights and/or concerns regarding technology support in your school?
Additional concerns include restrictive discipline policies that do not align to the vision of the technology plan, lack of time for professional development and curriculum integration, teacher input in policy-making, and restrictions on teacher-delivers content such as internet radio, internet video, and social learning.
Determine the degree of leadership, input, and involvement required in your school’s technology
plan from core members:
We are working from the district plan because we do not have a Dirigo High School plan.
Superintendent
Leadership: high
Input: high
Involvement: high
Local School Administrator
Leadership: low
Input: low
Involvement: medium
Technology Coordinator
Leadership: high
Input: high
Involvement: high
Classroom Teacher
Leadership: high
Input: high
Involvement: high
Parents
Leadership: low
Input: low
Involvement: low
Community Members
Leadership: low
Input: low
Involvement: low
4. Describe the mission statement and objectives of your school’s technology plan. These provide
general directions for the plan and should align with your school/district philosophy statement.
Explain how the mission & objectives address student needs.
The mission statement addresses equitable access to a technology-rich environment, life-long learning and good citizenship, and success in an ever-changing society. This is in line with Dirigo High School's mission. At the district level, the mission statement and vision has been in process through a program called Future Search. This information will soon be made available to the district. In reality, the technology plan mission statement alludes to providing citizenship skills, which are definitely needed especially in a "flat world".
5. Moving technology initiative forward requires the support of a lot of people. Please identify the
parties included in your technology plan:
28 people represent the committee.
c Administrative commitment-10% membership (3)
c Faculty/staff commitment-82% membership (23)
c School board commitment-3.5% membership (1)
c Parental commitment-not identified
c Community member commitment: 3.5% membership (1)
If any of these are not included, please indicate why you think they haven’t been included and if
you think they should/shouldn’t be included.
There has been no attempt to include parents as a subgroup of the committee. In our opinion this shows a lack of parental involvement in the development of the plan. As the biggest stakeholders, it is recommended they be included in future committee work. At least 10% of the committee should be comprised of parents.
6. Does your school technology plan specifically address your school’s hardware, software,
peripheral equipment & support/training needs? The key is that the plan considers what already
exists in the school, what can be used, and what is needed to begin to align your existing
technology program with where you want to be.
This is a strength of the plan: we know what we have, we know what we use, we know what we need, and we know we need training. With ten schools in the new district, this deserves kudos for the obvious work of cataloging technology hardware and software.
7. Does your school technology plan include an evaluation process to determine how the technology
is used & the effectiveness of these tools/approaches?
Unfortunately, the technology plan admits at its conclusion that in regards to assessment and accountability measures that "its too early in the life of the RSU to determine how all the assessment for the foregoing plan will be handled."
8. Does your school technology plan address multiple sources of funding (in-school, district,
contributions, grants, donations, state initiatives, federal initiatives, fund-raising, etc)?
This plan is referred to as a wish list, quote: "It is thus impossible to know what percentage of our wish list will survive the local budget process or receive the desired level of support from outside sources." The assumption is that funding is beyond the control of the plan with no clear course of action to look for funding outside of the district budget.
9. What does your plan’s communication network look like? Please be sure to include
responsibilities.
The plan is in .pdf form found in the Leadership Team subfolder on the FirstClass network. It is a work in progress and available to read, if you can find it.